Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProfessorGAC

(77,324 posts)
20. Graceful?
Sat Aug 5, 2023, 03:15 PM
Aug 2023

Last edited Sun Aug 6, 2023, 02:15 PM - Edit history (1)

I think probably not.
I'm not convinced at the eco friendly approach, except for finding ways to keep plastic out of our water.
But, unless it's converted to methane or ethane, the energy derived per metric ton of CO2 created won't be any better than petroleum.
Now, reusing plastic has some merit, absent a safe & effectively permanent means of hiding it. Like your burying idea, assuming it's foolproof.
But, making it into another low energy density (on an emissions basis) isn't helping atmospheric warming.
So, it was greatly oversold. Nice idea, not a great, world-changing one.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Everyone wins Tetrachloride Aug 2023 #1
Here's the key sentence that shows somebody made a bunch of $$ for the approval of this BComplex Aug 2023 #2
Harvard environmental law professor resigns from ConocoPhillips cbabe Aug 2023 #3
I Find It Odd That... ProfessorGAC Aug 2023 #4
That is explained in the risk assessment hyper-linked in the OP HeartachesNhangovers Aug 2023 #5
That Isn't Enough ProfessorGAC Aug 2023 #9
Just trying to help. If you want a technical answer to a technical question, HeartachesNhangovers Aug 2023 #12
I Know You Haven't Been Here Long ProfessorGAC Aug 2023 #14
"Don't you know who I am?" ZoltarSpeaks Aug 2023 #25
I'm just looking for a name waddirum Aug 2023 #6
I Can't Find It! ProfessorGAC Aug 2023 #7
Thanks for your hard work ProfessorGAC. nt Prairie_Seagull Aug 2023 #26
It could be these chemicals are already common pollutants... hunter Aug 2023 #13
I See Your Point ProfessorGAC Aug 2023 #15
I agree with you. hunter Aug 2023 #19
Graceful? ProfessorGAC Aug 2023 #20
EPA and NHTSA are dirty corporate whores. WarGamer Aug 2023 #8
What year was this? Who appointed the EPA head at the time? This is appalling. Hekate Aug 2023 #10
" EPA decided its scientists were overstating the risks" Takket Aug 2023 #11
My Question Above! ProfessorGAC Aug 2023 #21
Did you see this? scipan Aug 2023 #22
That Tells Me One Thing ProfessorGAC Aug 2023 #24
Thank you for your expertise in this. scipan Aug 2023 #28
So When NowISeetheLight Aug 2023 #16
No names or identifying info dalton99a Aug 2023 #17
Not THE ONION or Borowitz? Brainfodder Aug 2023 #18
What good is the EPA if they whitewash ... Duppers Aug 2023 #23
Read the linked story if you haven't. Mislabeling emmisions? The EPA. Give me a break. Prairie_Seagull Aug 2023 #27
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»EPA Approved a Fuel Ingre...»Reply #20